Using the easy way out again!!! Cut COEs!!!!

[Orionong]

  On 10/4/2011 at 6:10 AM, Gnixer said:

PR should just rent the cars from the market itself. Anyway they won't be here till they die. if not those would have convert to local citizen instead.

 

Not allow sgp to buy/drive malaysian car +1

3/4 stupid fuel rule +1

Add COE on top of buying car in sg +1

 

Please do not compare about the land between sg & malaysia.

when u need a car, means u need a car regardless on the land u r at

later say ppl say u Nazi mentality! hahahha

[Donut]

there goes the car sales people's rice bowls...... i can see alot of retrenchment from ADs to PIs. Some may even close shop.

 

The garment should just impose a 50% down payment for new car.... this will double confirm chop off alot of car buyers. Dont make car ownership so easy to have.

 

 

[Mockngbrd]

ok la... not so bad la... 40%

[Greatbirdlegend]

  On 10/4/2011 at 6:13 AM, Sosaria said:

And Godwin's Law is proven yet again!!!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

 

For those who don't know, in short, Godwin's Law says: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." In other words, given enough time, in any online discussion

[Mightymito]

Moral of the story is if you are not hard working or talentent just take a bus.

 

Why dont you complain about not having a bungalow with a swimming pool as well.

 

 

[Steptronic]

  On 10/3/2011 at 2:18 PM, Orionong said:

Why cant our Ah Lui be more creative in handling our COEs! Congested only means cut down on COE! WTH!always use the the easy way out.Y dun restrict PR in buying cars?or they pay higher COEs??Since we have world class transport! Owners with more than one car will have to pay a higher COE for the next and so on!?!Certain profession like sales people can have slight privilege in buying cars capped at certain category only? I think there are really many ways than only cut COE!!

This issue should be discussed in terms of supply and demand. Our minister talks about reducing the supply, where as you are talking about reducing the demand.

 

Bro, the BIG issue here is "number of cars on the road" and our minister is coming out with reducing the annual growth of cars, which is simple and straightforward way to reduce the cars on the road. Of course there are other ways of reducing the number of cars on the road keeping the annual growth the same, but again, we would suffer in terms of parking (less cars on the road, more cars parked).

 

The proposal from you (restricting PRs from buying cars, differentiating one car or multi car owners in terms of COE and all) will reduce the demand of the car and ultimately reduce the COE and not number of COEs.

 

Well, to me, reducing the COEs is the best way to enjoy better drive. What is the use of having cars when you do not enjoy the ride at all? (the case is different for those "MUST" drive - sales, patients etc. But, normal person like me is getting bored of driving on our roads in any working day!

[Mllcg]

  On 10/4/2011 at 7:30 AM, Steptronic said:

This issue should be discussed in terms of supply and demand. Our minister talks about reducing the supply, where as you are talking about reducing the demand.

 

Bro, the BIG issue here is "number of cars on the road" and our minister is coming out with reducing the annual growth of cars, which is simple and straightforward way to reduce the cars on the road. Of course there are other ways of reducing the number of cars on the road keeping the annual growth the same, but again, we would suffer in terms of parking (less cars on the road, more cars parked).

 

The proposal from you (restricting PRs from buying cars, differentiating one car or multi car owners in terms of COE and all) will reduce the demand of the car and ultimately reduce the COE and not number of COEs.

 

Well, to me, reducing the COEs is the best way to enjoy better drive. What is the use of having cars when you do not enjoy the ride at all? (the case is different for those "MUST" drive - sales, patients etc. But, normal person like me is getting bored of driving on our roads in any working day!

 

ideal situation would be increase the supply but reduce demand.

 

in actual fact, it actually is reducing supply and increasing demand.

[Mllcg]

  On 10/4/2011 at 6:24 AM, Mockngbrd said:

simpur...

IMPROVE public transport first, make sure every mofo in society can AFFORD to use it.

AND SHOW REAL EVIDENCE of improvments BEFORE touching anything related to cars. Benchmark will be HKG/JPN levels of puntuality and conenctivity with multiple modes of transport. Trains/buses overlapping.

 

Abolish COE / standardised minimal ownership road tax across the board.

Cars will still have PARF which last 10years, after 10years, they lose their PARF paper values. To keep a car over 10yrs will mean incurring paper-value loss. Will be up to owner to decide.

 

ERP@$10 a pop and distance/location-based road tax. Highest tax during peak-periods.

 

TAXI's / Commercial vehicles get discounted rates if traveling within town area within a certain time.

If TAXIs and Commercial vehicles leave the town area within a stipulated time-frame. No congestion charge.

 

Wanto buy car can, but to drive during peak periods will be a bitch. Driving during off-peak periods will not be such a bitch.

Car lovers can keep their cars, take the improved public transport system and enjoy their cars during off peak periods or in ulu locations.

 

Taxis/commercial vehicles can still do their thing if they are just making drop-offs/deliveries.

 

Replace transport minister. Abolish 3/4 tank rule.

+1

 

no need japan la. too much.

 

hong kong enough le. and until then, i will still keep my car.

 

btw, someone did say that overlapping bus and train route is a waste of resources as most would still take train. i forgot who.

[Baphomet]

  On 10/4/2011 at 7:45 AM, Mllcg said:

ideal situation would be increase the supply but reduce demand.

 

in actual fact, it actually is reducing supply and increasing demand.

 

increase supply but reduce demand. COE price will be low.

 

reduce supply and increase demand. COE price will be high.

 

Which one do you think the gahment wants?

 

but seriously..I think the only way to effectively reduce the car population is to cut the quota.

 

let it go under 1. till the car population become manageable, then increase back to 1.

 

I just don't like the biding system.

Edited October 4, 2011 by Baphomet

[AlexToh13]

  On 10/4/2011 at 6:24 AM, Mockngbrd said:

simpur...

IMPROVE public transport first, make sure every mofo in society can AFFORD to use it.

AND SHOW REAL EVIDENCE of improvments BEFORE touching anything related to cars. Benchmark will be HKG/JPN levels of puntuality and conenctivity with multiple modes of transport. Trains/buses overlapping.

 

Abolish COE / standardised minimal ownership road tax across the board.

Cars will still have PARF which last 10years, after 10years, they lose their PARF paper values. To keep a car over 10yrs will mean incurring paper-value loss. Will be up to owner to decide.

 

ERP@$10 a pop and distance/location-based road tax. Highest tax during peak-periods.

 

TAXI's / Commercial vehicles get discounted rates if traveling within town area within a certain time.

If TAXIs and Commercial vehicles leave the town area within a stipulated time-frame. No congestion charge.

 

Wanto buy car can, but to drive during peak periods will be a bitch. Driving during off-peak periods will not be such a bitch.

Car lovers can keep their cars, take the improved public transport system and enjoy their cars during off peak periods or in ulu locations.

 

Taxis/commercial vehicles can still do their thing if they are just making drop-offs/deliveries.

 

Replace transport minister. Abolish 3/4 tank rule.

 

 

i like this idea

[Mecontle]

  On 10/4/2011 at 6:45 AM, Donut said:

there goes the car sales people's rice bowls...... i can see alot of retrenchment from ADs to PIs. Some may even close shop.

 

The garment should just impose a 50% down payment for new car.... this will double confirm chop off alot of car buyers. Dont make car ownership so easy to have.

 

like that bank will retrench sooner, more will go buy stocks, more will visit bedok reservoir sooner

[Moredhel]

Ridiculous 'solution'.

 

 

1st car, market rate + prevailing COE.

 

2nd car, market rate + 200% prevailing COE.

 

3rd car, market rate + 500% prevailing COE.

 

4th car, market rate + 1200% prevailing COE.

 

Each subsequent car, percentage levy x 2 + 100%

 

Confirm car population drop.

 

 

Per household.

 

 

 

 

Oh, and separate private car COEs from Taxi COEs.

 

Don't understand why police car is a vios/avante while taxi is a CRDi....

[Richard_Peh]

  On 10/4/2011 at 8:40 AM, Moredhel said:

Ridiculous 'solution'.

 

 

1st car, market rate + prevailing COE.

 

2nd car, market rate + 200% prevailing COE.

 

3rd car, market rate + 500% prevailing COE.

 

4th car, market rate + 1200% prevailing COE.

 

Each subsequent car, percentage levy x 2 + 100%

 

Confirm car population drop.

 

 

Per household.

 

 

 

 

Oh, and separate private car COEs from Taxi COEs.

 

Don't understand why police car is a vios/avante while taxi is a CRDi....

Wow very good idea leh bro. Have you write to LTA your suggestion? Very support your idea...

[Si4dr]

 

Simply just want to make big $.

 

If not ask them to show sincerity by:

 

$1 non-transferable COE by lucky draw la...

 

 

[Si4dr]

double post

Edited October 4, 2011 by Si4dr

[Celicar]

  On 10/4/2011 at 8:54 AM, Richard_Peh said:

Wow very good idea leh bro. Have you write to LTA your suggestion? Very support your idea...

Not so easy lah. Families with many members that have driving licences will easily get around it, each person register one car lor.

 

If whether it is first/second/whatever is based on family, then how to define a family? Uncle/aunty/cousin count? How about in-laws?

[Moredhel]

  On 10/4/2011 at 9:32 AM, Celicar said:

Not so easy lah. Families with many members that have driving licences will easily get around it, each person register one car lor.

 

If whether it is first/second/whatever is based on family, then how to define a family? Uncle/aunty/cousin count? How about in-laws?

 

Basic Family Nucleus

 

Clearly stated out on HDB website. Use the same definition.

 

 

30-50% off tax levy for 2nd car discount for families with more than 3-5 children.

 

For 5 children to 10 children, the family qualifies for additional 30-50% off 3rd car.

 

And so on and so forth...

 

 

*Usage of 2nd and 3rd car limited to members of basic family nucleus.

Failure to comply may result in the withdrawal of the COE for all additional vehicles beyond the first, fine and repayment of discount + accrued interest

 

*PRs and FTs not eligible for levy discounts

 

 

 

My proposed amendments stem from 3 main outlying reasons from the feedback from Singaporeans and state policy as a whole.

 

1) It results in only needful purchase of vehicles and effectively limits the number of vehicles across the board of the spectrum of society. Believed to be balanced.

 

2) It promotes and provides incentives for Singaporeans with 2 children to effectively produce another 1 more child at least which would serve national interest.

 

3) We no longer have any need to find reasons and excuses not to lend our high liability vehicles to in-laws and relations.

 

 

Anyone wants to vote me for transport ministar?

Edited October 4, 2011 by Moredhel

[SimonTan]

News report just out on Tv.

 

Car del ears predicted by this year end, the car price will double!!

 

Yes...100% increased....possible?